1923 Marine Enlisted Uniform

Recommended Posts

The attached picture of my early post WW-II Marine private (no sign that cheverons were ever sewn on the sleeves) uniform. It is as I got it with a 1923 date stamped on the inside of the shoulder, EGAs, a somewhat faded French Croix d'Guerre Fourragère, and a leather waist belt that looks to it might German or French.

I didn't think that Marine enlisted uniform of the time called for a belt but it has brass belt hooks on both sides under the sleeves that look like they were always there (you can just see one in the pic), so I'm either mistaken about the wear of the belt or ???? It also came a pair of standard period straight-leg trousers and a pair of riding breeches in mathcing wool (unfortunatley I didn't take a picture of them). Anyway, I'm interested in what other members might have in the way of comments on it.

Semper fi; Bill

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The attached picture of my early post WW-II Marine private (no sign that cheverons were ever sewn on the sleeves) uniform. It is as I got it with a 1923 date stamped on the inside of the shoulder, EGAs, a somewhat faded French Croix d'Guerre Fourragère, and a leather waist belt that looks to it might German or French.

I didn't think that Marine enlisted uniform of the time called for a belt but it has brass belt hooks on both sides under the sleeves that look like they were always there (you can just see one in the pic), so I'm either mistaken about the wear of the belt or ???? It also came a pair of standard period straight-leg trousers and a pair of riding breeches in mathcing wool (unfortunatley I didn't take a picture of them). Anyway, I'm interested in what other members might have in the way of comments on it.

Interesting. If the ribbons are correct, this guy saw a lot of service. I can understand that he might still have been a PVT, but shouldn't he have some hashmarks, or were those not worn on this uniform?

G

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Interesting. If the ribbons are correct, this guy saw a lot of service. I can understand that he might still have been a PVT, but shouldn't he have some hashmarks, or were those not worn on this uniform?

G

Good question. I would think there should be but, as with the absense of chevrons, there is no evidence there ever were any sewn on.

Semper fi; Bill

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I find the ribbons highly questionable. First off, the top right appears to be a Sampson Medal. The bottom left is a 2nd Nic. Right there you have 30 years or so of service. If he has a Sampson, he should have a Spanish Campaign/West Indies. And during his Marine service, he received an Army Mexican Border Service Medal??? And they're all out of order.

Kurt

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I find the ribbons highly questionable. First off, the top right appears to be a Sampson Medal. The bottom left is a 2nd Nic. Right there you have 30 years or so of service. If he has a Sampson, he should have a Spanish Campaign/West Indies. And during his Marine service, he received an Army Mexican Border Service Medal??? And they're all out of order.

Kurt

Hello Kurt. Thank you for your comment on this uniform. I think the one you refer to as a Sampson medal ribbon is a Good Conduct Medal ribbon, though the blue center section seems wider than the standard Marine GCM. Your point about the Mexican border ribbon is something that I never really thought about before and is well taken. I honestly don't know if any Marines were involved in that campaign but, on the suface, it would seem unlikely.

The ribbons are as they were when I got the uniform but, in light of your comments, it does seem that they are not right. I would rather it have no ribbons than incorrect ones and will probably remove them altogether. Thank you, again, for your comments.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I believe Kurt is right, it is a Sampson Medal ribbon. Both ribbons use the same colours but the Sampson Medal has red and blue strips that are the same width while on the Good Conduct Medal the blue strip is about half the width of the red stripes.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The blouse originally had the high stock collar which was later depot modified (around 1927) to comply with the new uniform regluations. A brown leather belt was standard wear, though not the belt you have. The brass belt ramps are correct for that blouse.

To pick up on the discussion of ribbons and hash marks, if the WWI victory ribbon is original for that blouse, there should be at least a couple of hash marks on it because of the rolled collar. Also, if the collar insignia is original, the pattern 1925 "droop wings", assuming he got them around the same time as the blouse collar was modified, that would also create a gap of at the very minimum 7 years between the end of WWI and when that pattern of emblem was designed. So, at the very minimum, one hash mark is definitely called for, and probably two or more. Personally, I don't believe that style of enlisted collar emblems made it into the supply system very much before 1930. The pattern 1920 collar emblems were still being issued as late as 1930.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I just re-read the posting title and first post. I believe it should read Post WW1 rather than post WW2.

I do not know much about Marine uniforms, but I do know it was not uncommon to convert the collars of Army uniforms from standing to rolled style in the late '20's. It might be worth showing the underside of this collar to see how the conversion was done.

I suspect the collar opening on a converted Marine coat would be smaller than if it was made this way since the second button's location would not have changed.

Certainly this is an interesting transitional coat, even if the ribbons are questionable. It might be easiest to simply remove the upper row and still be correct.

Oh, do the two rows of ribbons match in construction? Same stule ribbons, pinback, etc?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There is no doubt that this blouse is a collar conversion. First, rolled collars were first mandated with the uniform regulations of 14 April 1926, thus any blouse made up to that time had the high collar. This one is dated 1923. Second, look at the seam running from the top of the upper pocket flaps to the neck. This was a feature perculiar only to the high collar blouses, and did not appear on factory made rolled collar blouses. Third, the round bottom corners of the lower pockets are characteristc of most of the high collar blouses, and did not appear on factory made rolled collar blouses. No doubt about this one.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You are right, it was a typo on my part.....should have said post WW-I. My arthritis is giving me trouble lately and I'm having trouble with typing accurately.

Sorry, I should have mentioned this in my original post/description. The uniform has obviously been converted from a stand-up collar to lapels. It is quite obvious where wool was added to form the lapels and undersides. As has also been mentioned, it has the diagonal seams across the breasts that were present on the stand-up collar tunics.

I can't tell if the EGAs have a hallmark or not. The screwposts are bent to the point where I can't get the spinners loose. I tried bending the lapel material back but van't get it back far enough to see any hallmark on the EGAs. They look to be well-detailed, the wings and anchor do not bend under pressure, and they appear to be made of bronze with a black finish.

Thank you all for your comments thus far. They have been very interesting and informative.

Semper fi; Bill

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Nice coat, but as noted, the ribbons could not possibly be original to it. Even if he remained a private, he would still have to have a several "stupidity stripes" or service hash marks on each sleeve.

I have had several coats that were modified from stand collar to roll collar.

CB

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Aside from the ribbonry discussion on this piece, I really like this coat. Within the past few months I have become a bit fanatical about converted USMC coats. This p1922/26 (a pattern 1922 conervsion fitting the 1926 regs) looks to be in outstanding condition and is a nice solid early date. Thanks for showing it to us. Concerning the upper row of ribbonry...knowing USMC prices lately, sold individually those may very well pay for the entire coat . To date this coat to its probable early 1930s use, the 2nd Nicaraguan Campaign (1926-1933) and the MC Expeditionary Medal (1929 (implemented) - onward) seem very correct for the coat. The Second Haitian ribbon that is on the same row seems too early as well (1919-1920?).

Again, great coat!!!

Ken

I am actively seeking USMC Named Good Conduct Medals and items pertaining to the USS Indianapolis CA35.